Half the season behind us, what FA targets are you most hoping on Schlenk's radar?

[Spud2nique]

2 hours ago, sturt said:

Yep.

Which is something different than wholeheartedly, I'm sure.

 

At least he can spell Hayward.  

[Spud2nique]

4 hours ago, sturt said:

Signing the one who has a higher ceiling is better than signing the one who appears to have peaked.

 

Well that all depends. We have a lot of P guys, guys with potential in Cam, Hunter, Huerter. We have the the future P’s covered. We need a N guy. A now guy. We need to get in the playoffs next year. Harrell would give us a better chance of accomplishing that goal than Wood.

 

[Buzzard]

3 hours ago, sturt said:

Right. There is no such quote.

If it pleases the jury, though, what you/we have heard him say, in this very thread no less, is that he's not going to go wild spending in 2020 just because he has the cap space. He's going to be choosy in 2020, and too, he's going to be more active earlier in 2020, which, by correlation (because it is the more pricey players who tend to come off the board earliest) means he will be pursuing that kind of talent level.

There is no indication what happens in 2020 if he doesn't get the kind of talent he's most interested to pursue, that's true.

On the other hand, the very fact that he's going to be choosy in 2020 put together with (a) a wider pool in 2021, (b) no pressure to win a championship in the 2020-21 season, and (c) the assumption that if he wants a higher level of talent in 2020, there's no reason he wouldn't also be seeking that in 2021.... all points to the conclusion that he'll make sure he has retained ~25m to ~35m (in today's dollars) of his cap room if he doesn't get what he wants in the 2020 market.

And what you/we can do is math.

And math says, he only can spend either in this free agent market or the next...

The only way you get around that is if you imagine Collins isn't a Hawk after his RFA market next summer, and it seems most of us assume Collins is going to be here... or, if you imagine Trae isn't going to be extended, and it seems most of us assume that Trae has now established himself enough that he will get that like countless lesser players before him have done.

 

I can believe Schlenk will try to get the help we need this year since he has stated he misjudged our depth and its quality. I think he will try to do that as due diligence and avoid overpaying as well from his standpoint. If he does not get us at least one rock solid role player ( 6th man quality ) , then I will consider the off season a fail.

I don't think he will be stupid with the money and end up with a Turner, Crabbe, or Bazemore like contract that is almost impossible to move. As far as having cap for 2021, signing one role player to a decent length contract and one over payed one year contract is a possibility. Then with Dedmon's 13.3M expiring we could have something around 30M. The brilliant thing about Collins being a late middle round pick is his cap hold in 2021/22 is only 10.34 Million.

I am not ruling out anything; but I am not going to blow smoke up my butt with dreams of AD, Leonard, or George coming here either. I think Schlenk does want a much better bench and learned a very hard lesson last season when it comes to depth.

Edited April 17, 2020 by Buzzard

[JTB]

Doesn’t matter to me if Ingram or Trez is the main target ...hell I’d be ok if they were both targeted and signed  . Bring them both to ATL I say...doubt that happens of course but I can see Trez as a more possibility of landing here.

i think the pelicans value Ingram so much to a point they’ll match anything but we’ll see what happens.

That said ....I’m hoping Schlenk is going by what’s best for the team rather than what he wants to resemble (GS). And I’m not saying Schlenk isn’t doing what’s best but he did emphasize Dribble, shoot, pass quite strongly in the very beginning and I believe his tune may have changed slightly from that yet it’s still the same goal if you get what I mean.
Capela for example doesn’t fit the dribble, shoot, pass strategy whatsoever but I do think he’s an excellent fit for this team all at the want time .....Same with Trez, if he’s signed I also think he’s an excellent fit that don’t fit the dribble, shoot, pass warriors like strategy Schlenk plans to adopt here.

my favorite thing about the Trez target though, is that he’s not just a 17-20 pt inside scorer only that he’s most recognized for.....he’s a POWERFUL 17-20 pt inside scorer! Trez likes to show his muscle with his style around the goal, going to the goal, etc...if this guy is near the rim he’s going with powerful, all our effort finishes! ...he can be overwhelming to secondary units especially which is why again he’s in the running for sixth man of the year for a 2nd year in a row. Trez found something that really works for him that can also be very impactful...i love that about Trez game though he’s doing it undersized. Anyways I just think that with all the shooting we’re likely to target as a top priority , having a Trez talent to go with that would be a nice option. Not mention I think in the playoffs where jump shooting seems to be tougher for most teams usually Trez will be even more valuable in those games.

trez is probably the only non shooting scorer and talent  Schlenk is realistically looking at in free agency. @sturt mentioned that the hawks would likely ask Trez to extend his range if signed and that’s likely true especially in this era. I’m sure no matter where he signs that team is going to ask him to expand his range even if he stays with the clippers but I still say if he comes here he will play the capela role off the bench when capela is not on the floor while taking it slow get comfortable to shoot from the 3.

[sturt]

13 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

....If he does not get us at least one rock solid role player ( 6th man quality ) , then I will consider the off season a fail...

.......As far as having cap for 2021, signing one role player to a decent length contract and one over payed one year contract is a possibility. Then with Dedmon's 13.3M expiring we could have something around 30M.....

I am not ruling out anything; but I am not going to blow smoke up my butt with dreams of AD, Leonard, or George coming here either. I think Schlenk does want a much better bench and learned a very hard lesson last season when it comes to depth.

  

9 hours ago, JTB said:

Schlenk said, ideally, he will add players he feels are still growing or can still grow with the young core that is currently in place. That’s why the Capela trade made sense because he’s only 25 years old and was losing value to Houston with its stylistic change on offense.

....which in turn leads to these thoughts...

 

8 hours ago, sturt said:

Let's start here.

Who is it, after all, who ordinarily are the guys who get signed early, my friend? And why would Schlenk say he expects to make offers, though also say that he suspects that those might not actually be successful?

Who is it, after all, who would almost certainly create competition at "positions?" I think we can safely rule out he's not creating competition at PG. Or at PF. Or at C, given he just obtained Capela.

That leaves SG and SF.

No twisting here to say that all that points to Brandon Ingram's agent reading this and saying to himself, "I wonder if Travis considers my guy a good fit, and might look to make an early offer."

Which... is what I've said all along. We don't know who Travis Schlenk considers to be a good fit, yea or nay.

9 hours ago, JTB said:

the Hawks aren’t going to wildly use their space just because they have it

This is also consistent with what Schlenk has always said--essentially that the best way to sink a franchise's momentum toward success is to be handing out expensive (either in terms of money or years or both) contracts to free agents. And so, it's also consistent with the premise that if he doesn't find what he's looking for in the 2020 free agent cohort, he's going to be content to wait for 2021.

9 hours ago, JTB said:

the best teams in the league are the ones that have the most depth

Which correlates with the "caveat" said above...

13 hours ago, sturt said:

Caveat--if he merely used the word "deep" somehow in the quote you're referencing, I believe we do have a point of reference for that, which would be his former employer.

So, indeed, just how deep did GS go in their first ultimately successful year (ie, what ATL is gunning to achieve)?

- 5 players total played 2000+ minutes and in more than 75% of the games.

- 3 additional players played 1000+ minutes and in more than 75% of the games.

That would seem to hint at the kind of depth that is consistent with how Schlenk thinks of "most depth"... "most" being indicative of the quality of the bench depth as much if not more than the quantity.

- 2 players played just less than 1000 minutes, 1 of those in more than 75% of the games.

Barbosa and Lee affirm that statement--both, at that time, were widely regarded as solid players, though now on the decline of their careers.

So, 8 players as primary, with 2 older vets to supplement as needed.

 

Right now, the ATL roster features, in order of minutes played for this season, and excluding those who, conventionally speaking, it's generally accepted won't be on the roster after this season:

1. Young
2. Hunter
3. Huerter
4. Reddish
5. Collins
6. Fernando
7. Teague
8. Dedmon

Of that list, only Teague is somewhat a question mark. Either way you look at it, though, that back-up PG slot has to be filled with someone Schlenk has confidence in, so if not Teague, someone who Schlenk reasonably has even more confidence in. Most rationally, if Teague re-signs, it would be to fill one of the "aging veteran" slots, not one of the primary 8... and because it would be the 3rd slot in the depth chart, it would need to be an ultra-team-friendly deal.

So, that leaves us with good reason to think that Schlenk's blueprint is to add 2-3 players his scouting leads him to believe will seriously contribute and play major minutes in 2020-21, or at least by 2021-22. If he can't do so through the 2020 draft and free agency, then his alternative is to basically do what he's done in the past, which is to sign players with some upside to 1 or 2 year deals, and look to the 2021 off-season draft and market.

Conventional wisdom seems to say...

- One of those is going to be a legit candidate for back-up PG.

- One of those is going to be a legit candidate to compete for a starting wing role.

- One of those is going to be a legit candidate to be a quality back-up post player.

I've got Yogi. I've got Ingram. And I've got Millsap.

Or, if not Ingram and if Ainge is dealing, I've got Hayward instead of Ingram, and Wood instead of Millsap.

I don't have a Plan C yet, other than eyeing Olidapo for 2021.

But maybe if I continue to be at home as many of us are, that will come in time. I'm strongly inclined to think, though, that Plan C will almost certainly involve somehow getting Wood. He's the only UFA on the market who has the kind of upper-tier upside that I think resonates with Schlenk's parameters... just my opinion.

 

So, that to say, we don't seem to be that far apart in how we think Schlenk will approach the off-season. We agree he'll make overtures to AD's agent, and that will go nowhere. We agree that he very well may sign a guy who will almost certainly come off the bench. We even seem to agree that he'll try to preserve ~$30m, give or take $5m, for 2021 if he doesn't get a primo talent this summer. And, we also agree that he's not likely going to obtain a Paul George kind of player... from your point of view, because a PG kind of player isn't going to be interested, and from my point of view, because a PG kind of player is too old for Schlenk to be that interested, short of some wildly team-friendly deal. (I continue to believe based on previous things Schlenk has said about how the experience he's had with Vince has persuaded him of the value of having that kind of voice on the team and in the locker room--but he's almost certainly not going to want to pay out the wazoo for that.)

The only way we seem to disagree is in my inclination that he probably deems pursuing Ingram to be a worthy effort, and that there is a 10% chance that effort would work out, if made.

Or, did I miss something?

[Buzzard]

1 hour ago, sturt said:

  

....which in turn leads to these thoughts...

 

 

So, that to say, we don't seem to be that far apart in how we think Schlenk will approach the off-season. We agree he'll make overtures to AD's agent, and that will go nowhere. We agree that he very well may sign a guy who will almost certainly come off the bench. We even seem to agree that he'll try to preserve ~$30m, give or take $5m, for 2021 if he doesn't get a primo talent this summer. And, we also agree that he's not likely going to obtain a Paul George kind of player... from your point of view, because a PG kind of player isn't going to be interested, and from my point of view, because a PG kind of player is too old for Schlenk to be that interested, short of some wildly team-friendly deal. (I continue to believe based on previous things Schlenk has said about how the experience he's had with Vince has persuaded him of the value of having that kind of voice on the team and in the locker room--but he's almost certainly not going to want to pay out the wazoo for that.)

The only way we seem to disagree is in my inclination that he probably deems pursuing Ingram to be a worthy effort, and that there is a 10% chance that effort would work out, if made.

Or, did I miss something?

You missed a lot. I said his priority was fixing our depth which he admitted to missing the boat on this season. Depth has nothing to do with signing Ingram or preserving cap. I only mentioned preserving cap as a option because it is a option. Especially if his targets this year do not sign with us or he does not like enough players this year to use it all on.

Schlenks opinion is spending money badly is a bad decision. So I read spending money wisely is a good decision. I don't read those two sentences as being one and the same.

Edited April 17, 2020 by Buzzard

[sturt]

20 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

You missed a lot. I said his priority was fixing our depth which he admitted to missing the boat on this season. Depth has nothing to do with signing Ingram or preserving cap. I only mentioned preserving cap as a option because it is a option. Especially if his targets this year do not sign with us or he does not like enough players this year to use it all on.

Schlenks opinion is spending money badly is a bad decision. So I read spending money wisely is a good decision. I don't read those two sentences as being one and the same.

Pardon the observation, but noooo.... I beg to differ, you seem to have missed a lot...

In regards to depth, I repeat...

2 hours ago, sturt said:

 

11 hours ago, JTB said:

the best teams in the league are the ones that have the most depth

Which correlates with the "caveat" said above...

15 hours ago, sturt said:

Caveat--if he merely used the word "deep" somehow in the quote you're referencing, I believe we do have a point of reference for that, which would be his former employer.

So, indeed, just how deep did GS go in their first ultimately successful year (ie, what ATL is gunning to achieve)?

- 5 players total played 2000+ minutes and in more than 75% of the games.

- 3 additional players played 1000+ minutes and in more than 75% of the games.

That would seem to hint at the kind of depth that is consistent with how Schlenk thinks of "most depth"... "most" being indicative of the quality of the bench depth as much if not more than the quantity.

- 2 players played just less than 1000 minutes, 1 of those in more than 75% of the games.

Barbosa and Lee affirm that statement--both, at that time, were widely regarded as solid players, though now on the decline of their careers.

So, 8 players as primary, with 2 older vets to supplement as needed.

 

Right now, the ATL roster features, in order of minutes played for this season, and excluding those who, conventionally speaking, it's generally accepted won't be on the roster after this season:

1. Young
2. Hunter
3. Huerter
4. Reddish
5. Collins
6. Fernando
7. Teague
8. Dedmon

Of that list, only Teague is somewhat a question mark. Either way you look at it, though, that back-up PG slot has to be filled with someone Schlenk has confidence in, so if not Teague, someone who Schlenk reasonably has even more confidence in. Most rationally, if Teague re-signs, it would be to fill one of the "aging veteran" slots, not one of the primary 8... and because it would be the 3rd slot in the depth chart, it would need to be an ultra-team-friendly deal.

So, that leaves us with good reason to think that Schlenk's blueprint is to add 2-3 players his scouting leads him to believe will seriously contribute and play major minutes in 2020-21, or at least by 2021-22. If he can't do so through the 2020 draft and free agency, then his alternative is to basically do what he's done in the past, which is to sign players with some upside to 1 or 2 year deals, and look to the 2021 off-season draft and market.

Conventional wisdom seems to say...

- One of those is going to be a legit candidate for back-up PG.

- One of those is going to be a legit candidate to compete for a starting wing role.

- One of those is going to be a legit candidate to be a quality back-up post player.

 

And backing up, you said...

  

20 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

Depth has nothing to do with signing Ingram

But to the contrary, according to Kirschner, Schlenk said...

 

11 hours ago, JTB said:

Schlenk said that if he believes there are young veterans who can help the team win games, it wouldn’t impede his decision to sign them if it meant there might be competition at some positions.

... right before he said he said...

11 hours ago, JTB said:

He smartly believes that the best teams in the league are the ones that have the most depth

Thus, adding a top tier wing who may start effectively creates depth anyhow.

So, yes, adding an Ingram fits that assertion. (In spite of how much it appears that it disturbs you to think it would.)

[Buzzard]

22 minutes ago, sturt said:

Pardon the observation, but noooo.... I beg to differ, you seem to have missed a lot...

In regards to depth, I repeat...

 

 

Sturt just said:

Quote

....which in turn leads to these thoughts...

 

 

So, that to say, we don't seem to be that far apart in how we think Schlenk will approach the off-season. We agree he'll make overtures to AD's agent, and that will go nowhere. We agree that he very well may sign a guy who will almost certainly come off the bench. We even seem to agree that he'll try to preserve ~$30m, give or take $5m, for 2021 if he doesn't get a primo talent this summer. And, we also agree that he's not likely going to obtain a Paul George kind of player... from your point of view, because a PG kind of player isn't going to be interested, and from my point of view, because a PG kind of player is too old for Schlenk to be that interested, short of some wildly team-friendly deal. (I continue to believe based on previous things Schlenk has said about how the experience he's had with Vince has persuaded him of the value of having that kind of voice on the team and in the locker room--but he's almost certainly not going to want to pay out the wazoo for that.)

The only way we seem to disagree is in my inclination that he probably deems pursuing Ingram to be a worthy effort, and that there is a 10% chance that effort would work out, if made.

Or, did I miss something?

So what does depth have to do with a 10% chance he may chase and sign Ingram or some strange reference to a primo talent is why he might preserve cap?

I don't get those references at all. It must be your way of confusing me. I think he just wants to fill out our bench but he wants to do it with smart money. Not albatross contracts like the ones I have already mentioned.

Edited April 17, 2020 by Buzzard

[sturt]

2 hours ago, JTB said:

I’m hoping Schlenk is going by what’s best for the team rather than what he wants to resemble (GS).

I don't think Schlenk or any other GM would ordinarily consider those to be mutually exclusive concepts... one normally considers his philosophy of team building to be "what's best," and often it's the same philosophy that a given GM gained when he was working with whatever successful franchise was his former employer.

 

2 hours ago, JTB said:

he did emphasize Dribble, shoot, pass quite strongly in the very beginning and I believe his tune may have changed slightly from that yet it’s still the same goal if you get what I mean.
Capela for example doesn’t fit the dribble, shoot, pass strategy whatsoever but I do think he’s an excellent fit for this team all at the want time .....Same with Trez, if he’s signed I also think he’s an excellent fit that don’t fit the dribble, shoot, pass warriors like strategy Schlenk plans to adopt here.

You make a valid point.

I'd be inclined to consider Capela more of an "exception to the rule" situation than some modification of Schlenk's overall guiding philosophy, though. Exception to the rules happen because of exceptional situations, and in this case, that acquisition was almost certainly steeped in an appreciation of two primary assets that player brings: defensive ability and a wildly-team-friendly contract, relatively speaking. EDIT; Oh yeah... and a team that was persuaded that his injury was going to make him a nothing asset for them in post season anyhow, so they were converting to a whole other concept at the low post... can't forget that exceptional part of the situation.

I've said, like you just said, I won't begrudge a Harrell signing. I'll just be surprised by it. I'll be especially surprised by it, given the quotes you were kind enough to bring to the table here... I read that he wants someone who can develop with the players he has, and that screams to me a guy who has shown promise but still has a whole lot of development and upside.

That's Wood, not Harrell.

But having said that, I do love Harrell's court vision and passing ability, so again, I won't argue too much if my perception ends up being wrong.

 

[sturt]

7 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

So what does depth have to do with a 10% chance he may chase and sign Ingram?

Answer: In the event that Ingram signs, it creates depth because it pushes either Reddish or Hunter to your second unit. But you're smart. You knew that. It's like you enjoy making me repeat myself.

In the event that Ingram doesn't sign, Ingram doesn't sign, and it's time for Plan B, and maybe C, and then maybe D... it's a priority list. And again, you knew that.

[sturt]

10 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

Or some strange reference to a primo talent is why he might preserve cap.

What is strange is that you just said a few posts back that you thought it reasonable he would preserve something in the $30m range maybe... and that that just happens to be the ballpark that would be necessary to sign a "primo talent."

You need some warm milk tonight. Argumentative for no apparent reason. I'm a nice guy. Really I am. Just ask Jay Bird.  

[sturt]

12 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

I think he just wants to fill out our bench

 

27 minutes ago, sturt said:

So, that leaves us with good reason to think that Schlenk's blueprint is to add 2-3 players his scouting leads him to believe will seriously contribute and play major minutes in 2020-21, or at least by 2021-22. If he can't do so through the 2020 draft and free agency, then his alternative is to basically do what he's done in the past, which is to sign players with some upside to 1 or 2 year deals, and look to the 2021 off-season draft and market.

Conventional wisdom seems to say...

- One of those is going to be a legit candidate for back-up PG.

- One of those is going to be a legit candidate to compete for a starting wing role.

- One of those is going to be a legit candidate to be a quality back-up post player.

 

(Who's disagreeing?)

 

[Buzzard]

15 minutes ago, sturt said:

Answer: In the event that Ingram signs, it creates depth because it pushes either Reddish or Hunter to your second unit. But you're smart. You knew that. It's like you enjoy making me repeat myself.

In the event that Ingram doesn't sign, Ingram doesn't sign, and it's time for Plan B, and maybe C, and then maybe D... it's a priority list. And again, you knew that.

But is signing Ingram for 27M smart money when you have invested a 4th ( plus three picks to get Hunter), 10th ( Reddish ), and 19th ( Huerter ) pick in wings over the past two years? I don't think it is but you seem to think its brilliant.

I think Ingram is a player Schlenk might not even call and he just might trade down and take Deni Avdija, Saddiq Bey, Isaac Okoro, Jaden McDaniels, or Aaron Nesmith. Which would make four wings drafted in three years. I don't get your infatuation with this Ingram all or nothing stance for 2020 free agency.

Edited April 17, 2020 by Buzzard

[Buzzard]

20 minutes ago, sturt said:

What is strange is that you just said a few posts back that you thought it reasonable he would preserve something in the $30m range maybe... and that that just happens to be the ballpark that would be necessary to sign a "primo talent."

You need some warm milk tonight. Argumentative for no apparent reason. I'm a nice guy. Really I am. Just ask Jay Bird.  

I said he could, if he struck out on his targets; all things are possible. But I hope he signs his targets.

Edited April 17, 2020 by Buzzard

[gurpilo]

hace 7 horas, Spud2nique dijo:

Well that all depends. We have a lot of P guys, guys with potential in Cam, Hunter, Huerter. We have the the future P’s covered. We need a N guy. A now guy. We need to get in the playoffs next year. Harrell would give us a better chance of accomplishing that goal than Wood.

 

I would not be so sure about that. Is clear Harrell contributes more to winning than Wood, he is showing that on Clippers while Wood is not showing that. However Harrell duplicates what Capela brings, they basically operates on the same floor space making difficult to play both at the same while Wood is a perdect fit for Collins and Capela. Defensively I think Wood fits better our team, rebounding might be a slight edge for Harrell but Wood protects better the rim. For me the choice should be clear for Atlanta, Wood should be also 5-6m$ cheaper.

[Spud2nique]

4 hours ago, Buzzard said:

You missed a lot.

He always does. You got stewed!  

3 hours ago, Buzzard said:

don't get your infatuation with this Ingram all or nothing stance for 2020 free agency.

He loves thinny!

[Spud2nique]

56 minutes ago, gurpilo said:

However Harrell duplicates what Capela brings,

No he doesn’t. Harrell will offensively beast in the back to the basket game. Capela doesn’t do that. They aren’t even really close to bringing anything similar besides boards and a high fg%.

[Spud2nique]

A bit more on Trez here. Notice how they mention the 88% in the pick n roll. Let the Trae/Trez show begin. 
 

The fifth-year big man finished third in Sixth Man of the Year voting last season, and he's unstoppable in the pick-and-roll, finishing in the 88th percentile as a roll man in 2018-19.

Where the undersized big man was once merely an analytics darling, he became well-known this past year as an uber-efficient, energetic super-sub who helped lead a 31-point comeback on the road against a fully healthy Golden State Warriors team in the playoffs.

Harrell is a rising star and will likely get lucrative offers next offseason. If the Clippers can to convince him to return for a discount like they did with Beverley and Williams, then none of these questions matter. But this will be Harrell's first contract post-rookie scale, and he stands to make quite a bit more than L.A. can offer without going way over the salary cap (which is an option). And when you factor in the Clippers' likely plans to pursue the likes of Giannis Antetokounmpo in the summer of 2021, giving Harrell close to a nine-figure deal over four years might not be in the cards for Lawrence Frank and Co. 

[Spud2nique]

More Trez  

Once again a Sixth Man of the Year candidate, Harrell somehow upped his usage after the Clippers signed two superstars, showing off a more refined face-up game than just about anyone thought he could develop. Once an energy guy, Harrell is now a refined offensive weapon, and he still does all the wonderful hustle things that got him on the court in the first place. If the Clippers can't afford to keep him, I humbly request that whoever signs him also trades for Lou Williams. 

 

[sturt]

7 hours ago, Buzzard said:

But is signing Ingram for 27M smart money when you have invested a 4th ( plus three picks to get Hunter), 10th ( Reddish ), and 19th ( Huerter ) pick in wings over the past two years? I don't think it is but you seem to think its brilliant.

 

Me:

Travis Schlenk, you want to weigh-in on this?

Voice from JTB's HS account:

"I believe I already did..."

7 hours ago, sturt said:

 

19 hours ago, JTB said:

Schlenk said that if he believes there are young veterans who can help the team win games, it wouldn’t impede his decision to sign them if it meant there might be competition at some positions.

 

 

And that makes sense, yes. Why? Because the end game isn't to justify his 2019 draft trades.

The end game is, whatever it takes, to justify this entire scenario where he's driven the Atlanta Hawks franchise into a 3-4 year ditch... ie, it's not good enough merely to get back to the playoffs, since that could have been the case without any ditch imposed... no, he's all-in on this ending up with ATL for the first time ever becoming a legitimate threat to win an NBA title.

So, it makes sense to accumulate all the top-end talent possible, through the draft in phase one, and now in phase two, to use this cap space as effectively as possible before it goes away.